The problems with a people's vote

Thinking about a people's vote / second referendum, I think that by sitting on the fence so long the MPs that are now calling for this have made it significantly more difficult for remain to win. 

1. It's not government policy to remain any more so there will be no government sponsored propaganda mailed to every voter.

2. The chancellor is pro - leave so there will be no project fear campaign emanating from the treasury

3. The Leave team have already won one referendum on this. They have all the advantage of a prior successful campaign. 

4. The Lib Dems can't campaign in a referendum with any credibility now. They want to unilaterally revoke art 50 without a referendum and have said they will not respect the result of a people's vote.

5.The personalities promoting remain are utterly toxic. Whatever you think of David Cameron and George Osborne now, at the time of the last referendum they were reasonably well respected across the spectrum and they still lost. Instead of those two making the case against Boris and Michael Gove, the remain campagin will be lead by Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonell with support from wee Jimmy Cranky, Tony Blair, Alastair Campbell and Gina Miller. It's a poisonous line up that damages the cause.

 

I think if I was a Remoaner I would be more frit of a JFC led second referendum campaign than I would of a general election.

You may have a point, but using the word "frit" makes you look like an utter bellend - just so you know.

4 is complete bullocks sorry

If your position is that Britain should stay in the EU then you can’t campaign for Remain at a referendum? What?

1. It's not government policy to remain any more so there will be no government sponsored propaganda mailed to every voter.

Good, because people fucking hate the government and there is a core of voters that will do precisely the opposite of what the government is recommending, on principle. That leaflet made people really angry and did more harm than good.

2. The chancellor is pro - leave so there will be no project fear campaign emanating from the treasury

As if people considering voting leave know who the Chancellor is. Lol.

3. The Leave team have already won one referendum on this. They have all the advantage of a prior successful campaign. 

On the back of a load of promises which haven't been delivered. How do they propose to pull more unicorns out of the bag now?

4. The Lib Dems can't campaign in a referendum with any credibility now. They want to unilaterally revoke art 50 without a referendum and have said they will not respect the result of a people's vote.

Meh. As if this will make any difference to the kind of people considering voting for the Lib Dems. Their USP is that they are the only party properly opposing Brexit, which is what 16 million remain voters want.

5.The personalities promoting remain are utterly toxic. Whatever you think of David Cameron and George Osborne now, at the time of the last referendum they were reasonably well respected across the spectrum and they still lost. Instead of those two making the case against Boris and Michael Gove, the remain campagin will be lead by Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonell with support from wee Jimmy Cranky, Tony Blair, Alastair Campbell and Gina Miller. It's a poisonous line up that damages the cause.

LOL. I won't even dignify that with a response.

I can’t  believe you engaged with #4, LP

She engaged with 4  because that's the only one there is answer to!

The answer to all of them is "lol, what a fucking stupid point, you cretin".

HTH.

Isn't the issue more the fact that there are a number of voters who won't read the deal or any commentary on it and will merely vote on the basis of what some bloke down the pub told them just like last time round?

Imagine there’s a referendum with two questions as has been mooted on here, ie 1. do you want to leave or remain and 2. if leave, do you want May’s deal or no deal

And this referendum is meant to solve the issue once and for all. 

If the result of question 1 is slightly in favour of leave and the result of question 2 is slightly in favour of leave with no deal, no deal wins with what might be a touch more than 25% of the voters in favour, assuming people who vote to remain are not obliged to answer question 2 and do not do so for obv reasons  

So 74 odd percent could well be against leaving without a deal and yet would lose  

That wouldn’t solve the problem

So given that it’s unlikely any deal would be approved by parliament because there will always be a back stop of some sort, isn’t the referendum better off being binary, ie do you want to leave without a deal or revoke Art 50

 

If the result of question 1 is slightly in favour of leave and the result of question 2 is slightly in favour of leave with no deal, no deal wins with what might be a touch more than 25% of the voters in favour, assuming people who vote to remain are not obliged to answer question 2 and do not do so for obv reasons  

Why would people who vote remain not answer question 2?

Leave have so much better ammunition now than they did before.

No only will they use the whole "betrayal by the whole political class" thing, they'll use the behaviour of the EU towards us (rightly or wrongly - wrongly in my view, it's our own fault), the EU army, the apppointment of Von Der Leyen, and all of the barbed comments towards the UK through the negotiations.

We can all naval-gaze about the details on here, but the messages of any second, third, fourth and fifth referendum will be much higher-level than that.  Most sensible commentators agree that leave has as good a chance if not better than the first time.  Helen Thompson gave a very good summary why on the excellent Talking Politics podcast.

The main issue for me on there being a 2nd referendum (and I have said this consistently) is that I don't think Parliament will be able to vote to pass the question.

Because if they want to remain they want to remain. 

Obviously they want to remain, but if the answer to Q1 is leave then they will obviously also have an interest in deciding what kind of leave.

A major part of remainers' grievances over the last three years relate to the fact that they have been completely shut out of the process for deciding what kind of Brexit we get, as though only the 17.4 million matter.

Of course remainers will answer the second question as well as the first.

Leave have so much better ammunition now than they did before.

No only will they use the whole "betrayal by the whole political class" thing, they'll use the behaviour of the EU towards us (rightly or wrongly - wrongly in my view, it's our own fault), the EU army, the apppointment of Von Der Leyen, and all of the barbed comments towards the UK through the negotiations.

Really?

I would have thought the fact that they have not been able to deliver any of the things they promised prior to the referendum in 2016 would be pretty serious ammunition for the remain campaign.

Use of the word 'frit' is intended to echo Thatcher, who of course was massively in favour of the EU markets opened up to the UK, so it should stop forthwith.

A good proportion of remainers will not answer the second question. 

Such a referendum would only solve the problem if the remain side wins resoundingly. 

either leave option would have the support of only a minority of voters

A good proportion of remainers will not answer the second question. 

Why would they not? I don't really understand the point you are making here.

Of course they won’t. The point is that it’s blindingly obvious why they won’t and I’ve already said why in case you didn’t see the obviousness the first time

It's not blindingly obvious why they won't vote.

Remainers, as we all know, are the more intelligent half of the population. They are more than capable of understanding that they are entitled to (and should) answer both questions.

Look, it is really not that complicated.

Most remainers will go, "I would rather remain in the EU but if we have to leave, I would rather leave with a deal than without one."

They are not going to go, "I would rather remain in the EU and if I don't get my way I will not answer the question but I will let the fuckwits who want to leave make that decision on my behalf even if it means food and medicine shortages and a border in Ireland."

I am a remainer and of course I would answer the second question. Only an idiot wouldn’t.

You don’t believe there is a good proportion of remainers who will simply answer the first question and not the second on the basis that they will not vote in favour of any form of Brexit, even indirectly?

If there is a second referendum, I'd put a monkey on leave winning again with a higher margin.

panda?11 Sep 19 10:54

Reply | 

Report

A good proportion of remainers will not answer the second question. 

Such a referendum would only solve the problem if the remain side wins resoundingly. 

either leave option would have the support of only a minority of voters

 

Utter bollocks. And the way to deal with your first point is to make it very clear to people that if they vote to leave in 1) they must be comfortable with either a deal or no-deal outcome, because either is a possibility.

 

 

You don’t believe there is a good proportion of remainers who will simply answer the first question and not the second on the basis that they will not vote in favour of any form of Brexit, even indirectly?

No, because as I alluded to above, remainers are more intelligent than leavers, and they know what chaos leavers are capable of causing when put in charge of making important decisions.

I'd answer the second question too. Do we not get a say in how our country flushes itself down the toilet just because we'd rather it didn't? 

If there is a second referendum, I'd put a monkey on leave winning again with a higher margin.

Where will these new leave voters come from, Judo?

Me too Judy.

And I put £100 on Leave and Trump, as well as a Tory majority under Cameron.  Sadly not as an accumulator as I could have fucking retired.

Well a two step referendum is a recipe for more chaos for the reasons I’ve given. 

Reasons which don't stand up to scrutiny. Seriously, remainers are more than capable of understanding a two question format. Leavers, not so much, but it doesn't matter in their case.

Anna you're massively overestimating how much voters scrutinise things.

Do you honestly think this Parliament could pass legislation on the question to be asked at a 2nd referendum?

Maybe "things" in general, but not THE THING that has dominated politics for the last three years.

Remainers are totally fed up of being ignored and they will make their feelings known.

Surprising that you think all remainers come close enough to your intellectual levels to behave the way you expect them to

Remainers are totally fed up of being ignored

*spits tea over screen*

panda?11 Sep 19 11:19

Reply | 

Report

Surprising that you think all remainers come close enough to your intellectual levels to behave the way you expect them to

To be fair since Hawking died nobody comes close.

Surprising that you think all remainers come close enough to your intellectual levels to behave the way you expect them to

Anyone of above average intelligence will be perfectly able to understand this very simple concept.

Which, incidentally, is more or less the dividing line between leavers and remainers.

panda?11 Sep 19 11:15

Reply | 

Report

Well a two step referendum is a recipe for more chaos for the reasons I’ve given. 

Agree. Should be leave or no deal

Lady Penelope11 Sep 19 11:22

Reply | 

Report

 

Anyone of above average intelligence will be perfectly able to understand this very simple concept.

Which, incidentally, is more or less the dividing line between leavers and remainers.

 

Wish that were the case, but there are plenty of remainers who voted for the status quo and are bored of it now.

They're bored of all this shit, not bored of the status quo.

I think that there are a lot of secret Brexiteers.

A friend of mine - Cambridge classics - now works for the FCO reckons that being a brexiteer is akin to being gay in 50s and you have to be secret about it and only with subtle gestures can you work out if the person you are talking to is also brexiteer.

Why don't all Remainers go and live in France?  It literally solves EVERYTHING.  

 

So simple, so easy.  Viva La FRANCE!!! 

They are bored of all this shit and some aren't as bright as you would like them to be. It's really hard to get people to understand that leaving with no deal is not the end, but the beginning of a very protracted process.

I thought it was - with an accent on the e.  But I couldn't do it - so I thought I'd go phonetically. 

I thought it was - with an accent on the e.  But I couldn't do it - so I thought I'd go phonetically. 

And you failed spectacularly since it is actually just "vive" with no accent on the e, and is not pronounced anything like "viva la France".

Good grief. Please don't ever leave the UK.

Surely you don’t think that 100% of remain voters would answer the second question? If the votes on both questions are close then it doesn’t take many abstainers on the second question to give a result with a victory for a minority overall. 

Surely you don’t think that 100% of remain voters would answer the second question?

You were implying that almost none of them would!

I would say that close to 100% of remainers would answer the second question as well as the first, which would probably be enough to influence the manner in which we leave.

A more interesting question is what happens if all people who vote leave opt to leave without a deal and all people who vote remain opt to leave with a deal if we have to leave. Probably an argument for making the results of the referendum public and bringing in a new law to ensure that anyone who votes to remain goes first in the queue for rations, followed by the people who vote to leave with a deal, and then the no deal fuckwits at the back.

I said a good proportion would not answer the second question. The OP is about the problem with a people’s vote and the fact that a minority of the electorate can win should there be a two step referendum is such a problem as it would lead to more chaos. 

I said a good proportion would not answer the second question.

Yeah, with absolutely no evidence to support why you believe that to be the case.

Let's get this back on track and talk about how pitiful the chances of remaining are with JFC leading the charge

Here is the honest answer.

There were many factors to argue for and against brexit in 2016 and there are slightly different ones now.   Immigration seems less of an issue, the difficulties of getting a decent deal and the horrors of a no deal brexit are clearer.  On the other hand many have become enraged by what they see as parliament frustrating the people and it has become a matter or principle.  I don't know and nor does anyone else how opinion has shifted in the light of all this but my suspicion is the country is pretty much split down the middle.

However, it is now so obviously not in the national interest to leave the EU that it is worth having another go to see if the vote falls the right side of the line and we can all finally put this behind us.  If it is still leave, us remoaners will have to shut up (including the Lib Dems).

And you failed spectacularly since it is actually just "vive" with no accent on the e, and is not pronounced anything like "viva la France".

Except is is pronounced exactly like that.  Maybe Veeev-uh would suit you better.  Either way, it is VIVA.

VIVA the LEAVER!!

It is one syllable. Should be nice and easy for you.

"Remainers, as we all know, are the more intelligent half of the population."

What do you mean by this? If you mean that the remain 48% of the electorate is identical to the more intelligent 48% of the electorate (in the sense that the members of the set of "remain" are identical to the members of the set of "the most intelligent 48%"), that is obviously not true.

Presumably you mean that the modal average member of the set of remain voters is better educated  than the modal average member of the set of leave voters, but even if this were true, so what? Just because someone might prefer to read the Sun to Sun Tzu, it doesn't follow that their vote counts less, or that they are not able to determine for themselves what is in their best interests.

And do you know what the funny thing is about less educated people? Is that they are actually the only people who really matter, because (with a few notable exceptions) they are the ones that do the jobs which we all depend upon to live. Human society could function just fine without management consultants, investment bankers, insurance lawyers etc. but tends not to do so well without farmers, fishermen, truck drivers, factory workers, prison officers, bricklayers, plumbers, cooks etc. 

 

What do you mean by this?

I mean, every time leavers open their mouths it's completely fucking obvious.

And do you know what the funny thing is about less educated people? Is that they are actually the only people who really matter, because (with a few notable exceptions) they are the ones that do the jobs which we all depend upon to live. Human society could function just fine without management consultants, investment bankers, insurance lawyers etc. but tends not to do so well without farmers, fishermen, truck drivers, factory workers, prison officers, bricklayers, plumbers, cooks etc. 

And that's great, but it doesn't qualify them to make complex decisions with serious and far-reaching political, legal and economic ramifications for the entire country.

I agree HD but that rather misses the point that the former could generally do the latters jobs but no the other way around (obvious exceptions both ways).

​​​​​Consequences of Remain :

the 17.5M or whatever it was who got off their arses and voted Leave and then ignored by nanny knows best/ yes it was a Leave maj but too difficult so sorry no can do/on second thoughts you’re too stupid to have a valid opinion etc

will most definitely come back to bite.

will most definitely come back to bite

Sure, but it's not a zero sum game. Those same people will also be fucking livid if we crash out with no deal and it turns out to be as bad as "Project Fear" told them it would.

There is no outcome that will make those people happy now, except for perhaps a handful of them that die of a heart attack on the day we crash out and don't actually live to see the consequences.

"And that's great, but it doesn't qualify them to make complex decisions with serious and far-reaching political, legal and economic ramifications for the entire country."

That. Right there. That the Remainer elitism which people rightly detest: "It's all so complicated that it would be far better if we elites just decided everything for the proles, who are too stupid to decide on these sort of things"

It also assumes, entirely without foundation, that intelligence is some sort of prophylactic against bad decision making. If anything the reverse is true, because clever people get seduced into thinking they understand things better than they in fact do andthat they can control risks which in fact they cannot. The 2008 financial crisis being a prime example.

Minkie the backlash was evident int he european elections where the brexit party won every single region in England and Wales except for London.

Actually HB, this whole shit show has come about as a consequence of people who are a bit thick being ignored by people who are more intelligent for decades and then manipulated by people who are both more intelligent and happy for them to be harmed into voting for something which is against their own interests. So blame on all sides really.

I agree HD but that rather misses the point that the former could generally do the latter's jobs but not the other way around (obvious exceptions both ways).

Enormous heh at this.

 

"Actually HB, this whole shit show has come about as a consequence of people who are a bit thick being ignored by people who are more intelligent for decades and then manipulated by people who are both more intelligent and happy for them to be harmed into voting for something which is against their own interests."

Here comes the other remainer trope. The poor thickos have been manipulated into voting for Brexit, and are too stupid to realise that EU membership is in their interest.

The obverse is true. If physical labour (in the broadest sense) is how you make your living and you do not own investment properties, the free movement of labour is not in your interest, because it increases the competition for jobs and housing, driving up your cost of living and driving down your wage.

If on the other hand you are a landlord or a business owner then free movement of labour makes you richer, because it means more demand for your rental property and cheaper labour.

One of the strongest Leavers I know is a professor of finance in a European university, has a PhD in theoretical physics from Oxford, post doc maths from imperial and has worked at the highest levels in the top tier IBs.

Speaks 3 European languages fluently.

He's really not "thick".

nor racist, nor whatever other insults remainers like to throw at us.

Here comes the other remainer trope. The poor thickos have been manipulated into voting for Brexit, and are too stupid to realise that EU membership is in their interest.

The obverse is true. If physical labour (in the broadest sense) is how you make your living and you do not own investment properties, the free movement of labour is not in your interest, because it increases the competition for jobs and housing, driving up your cost of living and driving down your wage.

If on the other hand you are a landlord or a business owner then free movement of labour makes you richer, because it means more demand for your rental property and cheaper labour.

You can't look at free movement in isolation like that.

Free movement might be more of a bad thing than a good thing for some people, but is it fucking them over more than a no deal Brexit will fuck them over?

Absolutely not.

Judy, I actually think it's worse if you are not thick.

If you're not thick then you ought to be able to see the negative consequences Brexit will have on the whole country, and how the poorest people will be the hardest hit. Do you just not care?

but that assumes that we think that it will have negative consequences, when perhaps our conclusions are that ultimately it is the better choice for all.

and actually the guy to whom I refer above can do predictive mathematical modelling which would blow most people's minds.

*although TBF, I can't even add up in Excel, so most maths modelling blows my tiny mind.

but that assumes that we think that it will have negative consequences, when perhaps our conclusions are that ultimately it is the better choice for all

Your use of the word "ultimately" gives you away here. You clearly do think there will be negative consequences at first, but that it will be worth it in the long run.

I can't get behind that approach, I'm afraid. What is your plan for the Irish border and supplies of essential medicines? How do we ensure that no one dies as a result of this? And if they do, is it a price worth paying for the benefits we might one day eventually enjoy?